This is a load of heresy and conjecture if ever I heard it.

Here's the stats of deaths in the UK, for example (2006-2010).

    +--------------------------------------------+
    | Year | Pedestrian deaths, hit by:          |
    |      | pedal cycle | car, pick-up or truck | 
    |------+-------------------------------------| 
    | 2006 | 3           | 233                   | 
    |------+-------------------------------------| 
    | 2007 | 6           | 267                   | 
    |------+-------------------------------------| 
    | 2008 | 3           | 247                   | 
    |------+-------------------------------------| 
    | 2009 | 0           | 141                   | 
    |------+-------------------------------------| 
    | 2010 | 2           | 123                   | 
    +--------------------------------------------+

More here: http://www.cyclinguk.org/campaigning/views-and-briefings/ped...

And here: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/uk_accident_statistic...

This year there has been a lot of bad press for cyclists in the UK as one 20 year old biker hit and killed a lady.

Lots of negative emotions and bad blood exposed, the court case got nationwide attention for weeks.

However nobody seemed to realise the dissonance that whilst 1 cyclist caused death is the ultimate heresy, drivers kill people daily without us batting an eye.

It's all a bit frustrating, I don't understand where this bias comes from - is it latent auto industry propaganda?

this case is a bit unusual. It wasn't a normal accidental death.

He modified his bike which made it illegal to use on English roads.

He had a pattern of dangerous riding.

He blamed the victim, and he lied about the accident and her afterwards.

It's a pretty toxic combination.

Specifically, he removed the brakes from his bike and was proud of doing so.

The press haven't been completely honest in their description of his bike. He had a fixie. Which is illegal, and is dangerous, but you can slow / stop the bike by simply not pedaling. People are acting as if he was cycling a runaway train.

They're quite common in the US and not illegal there.

This discussion is outdated but just wanted you're right, I think I was misled here: it's standard pedal-back-and-skid brakes. The newspapers here really did make it sound like he had no capacity to brake at all.

> drivers kill people daily without us batting an eye

Background noise - easily ignored.

> whilst 1 cyclist caused death is the ultimate heresy

Statistical anomaly - easily highlighted.

See also, e.g. "gun deaths in the USA vs Islamic terrorists"

I think those look like raw numbers, rather than adjusted by volume of use. To be comparable you would probably have to compare number of deaths per non-motorway miles travelled or something similar.

To add some more anecdata, I walk to/from work in central London every day. I will admit that I do occasionally see motor vehicles breaking traffic laws, but I see an order of magnitude more cyclists breaking the rules. I have both experienced, and witnessed multiple near-misses by cyclists ignoring the traffic rules/laws.

As there's no need for registration there's never any repercussions, so why not?

I'm sure in some cases there are justifications (it's dangerous travelling next to motor vehicles, so safer to cross major junctions in pedestrian phases), but as a pedestrian I have to not only make sure I'm looking out for when it's my turn to use a crossing, motor vehicles disobeying rules, and also cyclists who could come from any direction at any time at any speed. I think this is probably where the negative opinions of cyclists comes from.

But I've also witnessed pedestrians ignoring traffic signals and almost walking into cyclists as well. So in conclusion, people are the worst.

If you hurt someone while driving a bike or any other vehicle there are repercussions, if at fault you will probably be arrested, and charged with crimes up to manslaughter:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/18/cyclist...

Cars are far more dangerous, just by virtue of being heavier vehicles.

Indeed, cars/motor vehicles are much more dangerous.

In terms of repercussions, I was talking about the act of breaking traffic laws/rules themselves rather than actually causing a serious accident. With a registered vehicle, one can record a number plate and report it (or have red-light cameras). I would expect this to have an impact on behaviour.

> one can record a number plate and report it

Unfortunately, to take a general public complaint "seriously", MetPol want two minutes of video before -and- after the alleged incident. Good luck with that. Even if you do have video, it's exceedingly rare for any driver to suffer even a warning.

But that case shows the limits in the law. He was charged with manslaughter (a charge that was never going to work even in this case) and with a Victorian law - "wanton and furious driving" - a law which doesn't mention death.

> I do occasionally see motor vehicles breaking traffic laws, but I see an order of magnitude more cyclists breaking the rules.

To add to this anecdata, I see more vehicles breaking the rules than cyclists -but- even if it were 10:1 cyclists:vehicles, one of them is at least a ton of metal at high speed and therefore capable of doing many orders of magnitude more damage.

> this is probably where the negative opinions of cyclists comes from

People are inured to cars and tend to turn a blind eye to their minor indiscretions (perhaps because they happen at a distance - cyclists are less common, out of most people's experience, and much closer - thus more visible indiscretions.)

Really? On my walk to work from the station in central London, I probably see 20-100 cyclists running red lights, each time. I've had upteen near misses with cyclists because of this (crossing the road). Much rarer with cars imo.

I walk 15-20 minutes from a station in Central London to work and whilst I might see a handful of cyclists jumping the lights, I pretty much always see more vehicles doing similar or worse.

Boris Bikes[1] started operating in the middle of 2010.

I looked it up because I was curious about whether the scheme had any overlap with the above table.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santander_Cycles

I don't think anyone's worried about getting killed by a bike, they're worried about getting hit and being hurt. I totally understand, since a lot of bikers ride like maniacs and don't seem to give a shit about the rules.

Coincidentally, I almost got mowed down yesterday by a girl on a citibike. She made no attempt to slow down and if I hadn't stopped in the crosswalk, she would have hit me. As a native New Yorker, I am weary of cars, buses, and trucks, but I know where they are going to be, generally speaking. Bicyclists are a less predictable variable. They are harder to spot and don't obey any traffic rules to any large degree.

That said, I have observed that if they are a commuter with a helmet on, then they are likely to stop at lights and for pedestrians. If they have no helmet on, or are riding a citibike, then all bets are off and I should be very careful if they are heading my way.

I've always found that the safest way to cycle in a busy city is to behave as similarly to a car as possible. If you're acting like a car and participating properly in traffic flow, it's far less likely that you'll get into an accident or altercation with a vehicle.

This is helped enormously by 20mph speed limits around the city where I live. It means that at a busy junction in the city center, I can accelerate away and get up to traffic speed as quickly as a car, if not quicker.

While we are just having opinions on things I'll say pedestrians on their phones are the biggest danger to pedestrians of all.

Pedestrians on a phone are a danger to themselves, and can maybe cause an accident if they wander by mistake on the street. If I bump into another pedestrian I'm pretty sure I'll be fine.

A biker is a 60kg bag of meat coming at you with 15km per hour. They are completely silent and love riding on sidewalks.

In Paris, because no fatal collision of a cyclist with a pedestrian has occurred last year, that category has been removed from the yearly report : https://twitter.com/EmmanuelSPV/status/909330409099530245 - the killers of pedestrians are the motorized vehicles.

Bikers are more an annoyance than killers.

The fact that they don't kill doesn't mean they don't cause accidents though. If a biker hits ones hand or arm or topples someone over the accident won't show up in those statistics you cite.

it is much less dangerous for cyclists to be on the same path as pedestrians than them being on the same roads as cars. Its quite clear why.